Talk:Via Primordia
Disambiguation I guess, user Thanateros has something to say on the subject. Russel Hammond (talk) 20:07, August 17, 2015 (UTC) ---- Problem: A reader wants to browse an article for "Primordia", but as that word is used ambiguously we do not know whether they want the article on the triat called Primordia or the related religion also sometimes confusingly called Primordia. Solution: The wiki solution for ambiguous terms is a disambiguation page. The individual articles are then given more specific titles, such as Primordia_(Triat). In this particular scenario the published canon has already provided a more specific title for the other article, Via_Primordia. - Thanateros 2015-Aug-19th 07:38 UTC ---- Your problem: The article Primordia (Triad) is a part of the article Primordia, but I decided to separate them to eliminate the ambiguity. However, truth be told, Primordia and Primordia (Triad) are one and the same. Primordia is a belief system, not an institution, there's no official name to this belief system - they believe in the Primordia (the Triat, although they aren't seen as Triat themselves, but as a trio of spirits akin to the Triat) and that's how their belief system is called. Furthermore Primordia and Primordia (Triad) mutually refer to each other. If a reader enter any of these articles, she will find gateways to go back and forth between them. If you're worried a reader won't notice these references, you should simply add something like.. :main article Primordia (Triad) Problem solved. Aditional solution: The wiki solution for ambiguous terms is a disambiguation page. You're right about that, but there is no need to overcomplicate things. If you're still not satisfied with the solution I presented above, you should follow the example set by the wiki and create a disambiguation page (not the way you were previously doing it though). I can easily show you some examples of how it should be done: *Primordia (disambiguation) *Promethean (disambiguation) *Exalted (disambiguation) *Umbra (disambiguation) *Fate (disambiguation) Got the picture? Simply changing the article's name to Via Primordia, turning Primordia into a disambiguation page is wrong. There are no other sources that employ the term. This article is the only Primordia there is, and Primordia (Triad) was always a part of it. If a reader is browsing for "Primordia" she will easily discover that all articles on the subject are interrelated and intuitive. Russel Hammond (talk) 17:08, August 19, 2015 (UTC) ---- The failing of appending "_(disambiguation)" to create a title for a disambiguation page is that no one will ever mistakenly create a link to such an article. The wiki precedents that I follow are the more effectively titled disambiguation pages such as the Kindred disambiguation page, which chronologically precedes all of your examples of less effectively titled disambiguation pages. - Thanateros 2015-Aug-21st 10:54 UTC This could be applied if the term was employed by a different scenario (like "Kindred" from VTR or "Kindred" from VTM). Such is not the case with Primordia, because the articles are interrelated -- in fact, as I previously stated, they are one and the same (it was my personal decision to split them apart to be more specific). OBS: you may edit only your messages in this discussion, not mine. Please don't do it again. Russel Hammond (talk) 15:30, August 21, 2015 (UTC) ---- Scenario is not relevant; an ambiguous term is an ambiguous term, and Term is a more effective disambiguation title than Term_(disambiguation). - Thanateros 2015-Aug-21st 16:54 UTC Ok my friend, the discussion is over. I offered several diplomatic solutions but you are just being stubborn. You may keep editing the article as much as you want and I'll keep changing it back. Have a good day. Russel Hammond (talk) 17:14, August 21, 2015 (UTC) ---- Russel, you are being disingenuous when you claim to have been diplomatic; if you had truly wanted to be diplomatic you would have started a sincere talk page discussion prior to starting a revision/undo war. Instead your first response was to condescendingly tell me that my disambiguation was wrong, despite the fact that I followed a wiki precedent which preceded all of your less effective disambiguation examples. Even the wording of the text automatically generated by the tag evidences an expectation that the title of the disambiguation page will be just the ambiguous term itself. Primordia is an ambiguous term, Ambiguous_Term without parenthetical suffix is the most effective title for a disambiguation page, and there is well established precedent in this wiki of such titling; these three facts combine to provide an extremely strong argument in my favor. You have no comparably strong argument; you are simply egotistically exerting your own preference regarding which of two published canon terms you personally prefer, which is insufficient justification for the revision/undo war that you started. My goal here is optimal clarity via optimal disambiguation; your goal appears to be the stubbornly self-absorbed indulgence of your personal preferences even in the face of a clearly superior disambiguation technique. You have been condescendingly self-absorbed from the very beginning. - Thanateros 2015-Aug-22nd 6:10 UTC I'm not gonna argue with you anymore my friend. For a second there I really thought you were trying to improve the wiki as the rest of us. But that second has passed and I realized you're a troll. You are not trying to reach common ground on the matter at hand, you're only trying to satisfy your ego. But I'm not gonna lecture you... keep being who you are, keep doing your thing - and I'll do mine. Russel Hammond (talk) 06:20, August 22, 2015 (UTC) ---- My contribution here is optimizing clarity via optimizing disambiguation, which you confusedly equate to "trolling". Since you clearly do not value clarity via optimal disambiguation, I am truly curious as to what quality you believe you are contributing? - Thanateros 2015-Aug-22nd 6:30 UTC If this interpretation of what just transpired makes you feel better, then go for it! As I said before, you should continue to do your thing and have a nice day my friend. The discussion is over and I'm not here to lecture anyone. Russel Hammond (talk) 06:42, August 22, 2015 (UTC)